Bills to play most of the team vs. Jets including Josh Allen

[Dopey]

22 hours ago, I am the egg man said:

You're right, thanks.

 

Do I need to go to confession, just went two weeks ago ?

Depends on how your last 2 weeks have gone. If you wanna get something off your chest, we're here for you.

[Fan in Chicago]

11 hours ago, NoSaint said:

meh. I get it but you know guys 4 and 5 on the list may be frustrated - especially if a little dinged up. Or 6 and 7 if you do 5 and so on. 
 

I don’t agree, but it’s also not insane. Just need to know your team to make the call.

Not quite my point. BB saying that he doesnt know how many starters he has is equivalent to deflecting the question. Perhaps a better posed question may be "will you rest few of the critical players". He very well knows what the real question is, yet chooses to provide these dense replies which he thinks implies genius on his part. He is undoubtedly a great coach but not a good orator. 

[uticaclub]

The only thing worse than an injury is going out, trying and getting smoked by the Jets. The team earned a Week 17 bye, by taking care of their business. This is a mistake that McDermott will learn from

[row_33]

3 minutes ago, uticaclub said:

The only thing worse than an injury is going out, trying and getting smoked by the Jets. The team earned a Week 17 bye, by taking care of their business. This is a mistake that McDermott will learn from

that would be so Billsy

 

injuries and losing 

[egd]

On 12/24/2019 at 8:49 AM, Kirby Jackson said:

I don’t like it personally. There is NO upside imo. What do you guys think?

 

 

The upside is finishing 11-5, vs. 10-6, and not having the first two-game losing streak of the season. Winners don't play scared.

1 hour ago, row_33 said:

that would be so Billsy

 

injuries and losing 

 

The Eagles lost Wentz and still won the SB. The Giants lost Simms and still won the SB.

 

I have no objection to pulling the starters once the Bills are up by 21. Allen still needs the work. You have to earn the right to take a week off. The Bills have not earned it yet.

Edited December 25, 2019 by egd

[Kirby Jackson]

56 minutes ago, egd said:

The upside is finishing 11-5, vs. 10-6, and not having the first two-game losing streak of the season. Winners don't play scared.

 

So Baltimore is scared or losers?

[Nextmanup]

Makes sense coming from McDermott.  He's the least logical/scientific/linear thinking guy you now.

 

He once admitted to challenging a penalty because he felt it sent a message to the team.

 

I'm sure he thinks there is a thing called "momentum" in sports and it's important to maintain it going into the playoff game.

 

Dude's replaceable.

 

 

[Albwan]

24 minutes ago, Nextmanup said:

Makes sense coming from McDermott.  He's the least logical/scientific/linear thinking guy you now.

 

He once admitted to challenging a penalty because he felt it sent a message to the team.

 

I'm sure he thinks there is a thing called "momentum" in sports and it's important to maintain it going into the playoff game.

 

Dude's replaceable.

 

 

Lol...first Bills coach to sniff the playoffs in how long?...and does it 2 out 3 years, AND

the team a few years ago was pitiful.

Totally replaceable.

[DCbillsfan]

6 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

It wasn't just defense.  The OL did not block well on key downs.  Allen started the game playing poorly and misfired at the end.

 

 

There's the other side of the coin there too.  McDermott's team is built on "do your 1/11"

 

Now if a player is injured that's one thing

But otherwise, how do you say "everybody needs to do their 1/11 and every 1/11 is critically important" and then just go along and pick who rests? 

 

The Bills have invested heavily on defense and it's McDermott's forte.  Yeah offense didn't play particularly well but that was the Bills worse game on defense this year.  I think McD expected more from his team and in particular the defense.  Now the starters are playing against the Jets.

[row_33]

1 hour ago, egd said:

The upside is finishing 11-5, vs. 10-6, and not having the first two-game losing streak of the season. Winners don't play scared.

 

The Eagles lost Wentz and still won the SB. The Giants lost Simms and still won the SB.

 

I have no objection to pulling the starters once the Bills are up by 21. Allen still needs the work. You have to earn the right to take a week off. The Bills have not earned it yet.

Eagles sprang a gimmick O on the NFL with two solid QBs, the NFL solved the gimmick over the offseason after the SB win, one and done fluke winner

 

the Giants had a suitable replacement for the barely above good Phil Simms, Parcells knew how little value Simms provided and let him know it every single day.

 

[Alphadawg7]

This is a YOUNG team.

 

This is a team coming off an emotional defeat to a team they may see again in playoffs.

 

This is a team that’s been starting games slow offensively.  
 

This season is just the beginning, and not a last chance scenario.  
 

This is an offense with 9 new starters this year still coming together.
 

This is a team still learning to win and reduce mistakes.
 

Therefore:  It’s better that they play, at least part of the game.  Its not a good thing to go into the post season with a 2 week gap for our young starters and potentially on a streak of losing 3 games in last 4 (assuming backups lost to Jets).  
 

If someone gets hurt, well that’s football.  Resting starters would be like playing not to lose vs playing to win.  
 

If they want to win in the playoffs, then it’s better to keep the machine oiled.  If this was a veteran team with lots of playoff experience, then I would say let them rest.  But we need the reps.

 

I fully support this decision no matter what the outcome is.  McD obviously feels the same way.  

Edited December 25, 2019 by Alphadawg7

[Plano]

Let's be real.

They'll play one drive and you'll see the backups come in

 

Book it. This is no big deal.

[Bookie Man]

They'll play... About a quarter 

[Magox]

33 minutes ago, Albwan said:

Lol...first Bills coach to sniff the playoffs in how long?...and does it 2 out 3 years, AND

the team a few years ago was pitiful.

Totally replaceable.

There are some terrible posters but Nextmanup takes it to a whole new level.   

26 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

This is a YOUNG team.

 

This is a team coming off an emotional defeat to a team they may see again in playoffs.

 

This is a team that’s been starting games slow offensively.  
 

This season is just the beginning, and not a last chance scenario.  
 

This is an offense with 9 new starters this year still coming together.
 

This is a team still learning to win and reduce mistakes.
 

Therefore:  It’s better that they play, at least part of the game.  Its not a good thing to go into the post season with a 2 week gap for our young starters and potentially on a streak of losing 3 games in last 4 (assuming backups lost to Jets).  
 

If someone gets hurt, well that’s football.  Resting starters would be like playing not to lose vs playing to win.  
 

If they want to win in the playoffs, then it’s better to keep the machine oiled.  If this was a veteran team with lots of playoff experience, then I would say let them rest.  But we need the reps.

 

I fully support this decision no matter what the outcome is.  McD obviously feels the same way.  

 

It’s a matter of routine and my hunch is that most of the starters will play anywhere from a quarter to a half.  I’m fully supportive of whatever McD decides, he’s earned the right of the benefit of the doubt.

[Gugny]

1 hour ago, Nextmanup said:

Makes sense coming from McDermott.  He's the least logical/scientific/linear thinking guy you now.

 

He once admitted to challenging a penalty because he felt it sent a message to the team.

 

I'm sure he thinks there is a thing called "momentum" in sports and it's important to maintain it going into the playoff game.

 

Dude's replaceable.

 

 

Do you have a link?

 

McDermott has challenged exactly one penalty, in which he challenged that there was OPI on Josh Gordon during the week 4 game vs. NE*.  (he lost the challenge)

 

What message, pray tell, was that supposed to send to the team?

[HardyBoy]

7 hours ago, Sharky7337 said:

Because no one has been game planning to take him out of the game for like 2 years now...... you people crack me up

 

5 hours ago, Scott7975 said:

Josh will probably only play like 2 series.  There really isn't anything that's going to be figured out that hasn't already been figured out.  

 

So McD calls a timeout so can get a free look at how the cowboys would respond to a specific pressure look later in the game, Romo gets hearts in his eyes for McD, people who understand football on this board go wild with praise...yet it's just two series in this case, no big deal...that was one play, clearly it matters!

 

If you look at Allen's progression it is jagged. People figure him out, he looks rough for a week or two, he adjusts looks awesome, they figure him out, he looks bad, Bills adjust he looks great again. Why would you want a top 20 all time d coordinator to get a chance to show a pressure package with backend coverage that confuses JA a week before a one and done situation?!

 

And just to help me clarify...the argument is you could fall on the ground walking to your car in the morning so therefore base jumping off a cliff is not risky...logical falicy much?

Edited December 25, 2019 by HardyBoy

[Scott7975]

37 minutes ago, HardyBoy said:

 

 

So McD calls a timeout so can get a free look at how the cowboys would respond to a specific pressure look later in the game, Romo gets hearts in his eyes for McD, people who understand football on this board go wild with praise...yet it's just two series in this case, no big deal...that was one play, clearly it matters!

 

If you look at Allen's progression it is jagged. People figure him out, he looks rough for a week or two, he adjusts looks awesome, they figure him out, he looks bad, Bills adjust he looks great again. Why would you want a top 20 all time d coordinator to get a chance to show a pressure package with backend coverage that confuses JA a week before a one and done situation?!

 

And just to help me clarify...the argument is you could fall on the ground walking to your car in the morning so therefore base jumping off a cliff is not risky...logical falicy much?

 

No the argument is he can get hurt anytime.  It matters not if he gets hurt in this game or the next.  The result is the same.  They are paid to take that risk.  But im not going to argue this again.  No point.  I think they need more work and so does the coach.

Edited December 25, 2019 by Scott7975

[BillsCuse]

It simply comes down to risk vs. reward.  The risk of an injury far outweighs any argument to play the starters.    Playoffs are the very next week - even a minor injury keeping a player out a few weeks can hurt us bad.

Edited December 25, 2019 by BillsCuse

[HardyBoy]

34 minutes ago, Scott7975 said:

 

No the argument is he can get hurt anytime.  It matters not if he gets hurt in this game or the next.  The result is the same.  They are paid to take that risk.  But im not going to argue this again.  No point.  I think they need more work and so does the coach.

 

Ok...so Rocky in movie Rocky...he gets a shot at the champ for the title...it's a super long shot, but it's still a shot. 

 

What would you say if he fought a totally meaningless fight against some schlub who was potentially soaking his gloves in plaster the week before he got his shot? 

 

What if he broke his hand in that meaningless fight and couldn't fight against Apollo?

[Patrick Duffy]

1 hour ago, Gugny said:

 

Do you have a link?

 

McDermott has challenged exactly one penalty, in which he challenged that there was OPI on Josh Gordon during the week 4 game vs. NE*.  (he lost the challenge)

 

What message, pray tell, was that supposed to send to the team?

He won't respond. One of those "hit ya with a bull ***** post and runs" type.

[Scott7975]

18 minutes ago, HardyBoy said:

 

Ok...so Rocky in movie Rocky...he gets a shot at the champ for the title...it's a super long shot, but it's still a shot. 

 

What would you say if he fought a totally meaningless fight against some schlub who was potentially soaking his gloves in plaster the week before he got his shot? 

 

What if he broke his hand in that meaningless fight and couldn't fight against Apollo?

 

Well that would never happen.  Although what could happen is he could be training for his fight.  Then drop a weight on his foot and break his foot.  The chance of injury in a football game is like 4.1% according to statistics.  Can injury happen?  Yeah.  Am I worried about it? No.  There is a chance someone could blow their ACL in practice too.  Should they not practice just in case? This team needs work.  The more experience they can get the better.  There is no better experience than playing in a live game.

Edited December 25, 2019 by Scott7975

[SF Bills Fan]

If that is the case lmi hope they cool it on the QB runs and also work Duke into the offense- what is there to lose?

[Billsatlastin2018]

On 12/24/2019 at 2:33 PM, Buffalo716 said:

You literally can get hurt in practice as easy as in a game

 

Injuries are a generally random occurrence and the Bills do need the work

 

We aren't a dynasty, we don't have #1 locked up, we aren't defending champs..  we are the Buffalo Bills...

 

A young team that still needs to grow. ? the players should be playing

 

It is precisely because you have #5 locked up, that you do!

 

The Bills need to play 3 games to advance to the SB.

 

#1 & 2 don’t!

 

Only fools play 4 at this time of year, to gain absolutely nada! 

[kota]

18 hours ago, Da webster guy said:

Here are some facts:

 

Over the last five years, from 2014 through the 2018 season, teams returning from a bye week have a collective record of 84-76. That's 84 wins and 74 losses for a winning percentage of 54.5%.

 

This trend of teams returning from a bye week having a winning percentage slightly higher than .500 has remained consistent for several years. It supports the belief that teams with fresh legs have a small advantage over teams that didn't have the last week off.

 

We are 4-1 after bye weeks since 2014

 

Its a 16 game, grueling season, and we have 4 rookies that are a big part of our team in Ed, Motor, Knox and Cody.  Coaches say the rookie wall is a real thing, if they're right, then why not take a bye week here?  At least for the rooks.

 

Backup talent needs reps too.  Barkley, Duke, Spencer Long, Darryl, Perry at RB, Corey Thompson & Stanford at LB, Sweeney at TE--Lots of guys need reps and we need to see more of them in real game situations.  Evaluation AND in the event a man goes down they're that much more prepared.

 

Dropping a game to the Jets would raise us up in each round of the draft and slide them down in each round.  Also a plus.

 

So the coaching staff knows all this, which means if they play starters a lot Sunday they must feel like there are things we need to correct before playing Houston, and doing it in a real game is the best way.

 

My question to McD would be, if you insist on playing starters, why didn't you play any of them in the 4th preseason game?  Both precede huge games, but are also meaningless for a playoff bid.  Makes no sense.

 

My opinion is that resting every single player you possibly can is more advantageous.  

 

 

 

 

it's not a bye week.  

[Scott7975]

12 minutes ago, Billsatlastin2018 said:

 

It is precisely because you have #5 locked up, that you do!

 

The Bills need to play 3 games to advance to the SB.

 

#1 & 2 don’t!

 

Only fools play 4 at this time of year, to gain absolutely nada! 

 

So Belichick is a fool.

[Bookie Man]

I think the starters should at least play a few series. Both times, coming out after a week off (preseason week 4 and bye week 6), they came out a little imprecise. They had a lot of mental mistakes vs NYJ week 1 and didn't start off well coming off the bye vs the Ravens. They pretty much used to 1st half to get warmed up, before actually playing the 2nd half it seemed like. I'd like to get our players rested up and healthy, but don't want them coming out flat in a very winnable playoff game, esp on the road.

[Billsatlastin2018]

27 minutes ago, Scott7975 said:

 

So Belichick is a fool.

 

 

You understand what the word 'CLINCH means, right?

[LB48]

On 12/24/2019 at 11:49 AM, Kirby Jackson said:

I don’t like it personally. There is NO upside imo. What do you guys think?

 

 

 

On 12/24/2019 at 11:49 AM, Kirby Jackson said:

I don’t like it personally. There is NO upside imo. What do you guys think?

 

 

I hope Duke has 8 catches and Yeldon runs for 100 yards!

 

[kota]

During the Bill Belichick regime in New England, resting starters has been a non-issue. The almighty hooded one does not do it. 

And his teams, perhaps not so coincidentally, rarely lose in the first round of the playoffs.

In 2007, with home-field advantage locked up but a perfect season one win away, Belichick played his starters throughout. The Patriots won the season finale, securing the NFL's first 16-0 record, and ran the table to get to Super Bowl XLI.

Last year, the Ravens were still in contention for the No. 1 seed so the Patriots didn't have the option to rest starters.

"I think that's a conversation that you can have, and the fans can have, but it's not really part of our approach to the game," Belichick told Boston.com. "I don't think it's a good one to have. I don't really understand it either. You're going to pick out one guy that is important and say somebody else isn't? I don't think that's a good way to manage your football team."

[HardyBoy]

2 hours ago, Scott7975 said:

 

Well that would never happen.  Although what could happen is he could be training for his fight.  Then drop a weight on his foot and break his foot.  The chance of injury in a football game is like 4.1% according to statistics.  Can injury happen?  Yeah.  Am I worried about it? No.  There is a chance someone could blow their ACL in practice too.  Should they not practice just in case? This team needs work.  The more experience they can get the better.  There is no better experience than playing in a live game.

 

That's a straw man, I'm not talking about practice, I'm talking about games...stop with the logical fallacies please.

 

So why wouldn't Rocky fight some random dude the week or four before his fight with Apollo?

[Scott7975]

51 minutes ago, Billsatlastin2018 said:

 

 

You understand what the word 'CLINCH means, right?

 

You understand the Belichick hasn't rested starters even when 'CLINCHED, right?

10 minutes ago, HardyBoy said:

 

That's a straw man, I'm not talking about practice, I'm talking about games...stop with the logical fallacies please.

 

So why wouldn't Rocky fight some random dude the week or four before his fight with Apollo?

 

Straw man?  Logical Fallacies?  You brought up Rocky bro.  I'm done here.

 

Because fighters don't fight like that.

[HardyBoy]

Now I will say this. They have a sports science dept and detailed stats on each player in terms of their acceleration, top speed, cut abgle, etc with all sorts of variables baked in.  They know how much rest will cause certain players and positions will cause them to get out of game fitness/shape.

 

My guess, there will be certain players that the moment they hit a certain heart rate or some other measure they will get pulled. My guess is also for many players those benchmarks could get hit in pregame warm-ups.

[HardyBoy]

3 minutes ago, Scott7975 said:

 

You understand the Belichick hasn't rested starters even when 'CLINCHED, right?

 

Straw man?  Logical Fallacies?  You brought up Rocky bro.  I'm done here.

 

Because fighters don't fight like that.

 

Yes, you're making up a different argument that is easier to win and arguing that instead of the one we are having, but acting like it proves your point. The chance of an injury in practice for JA with a red non-contact jersey are not the same as in a game.

 

I have no doubt that boxing league Rocky was fighting in at the start of the movie had boxers fighting weekly btw.

 

I love the passion you are brining to this discussion, and I really do think you are approaching this genuinely (would be an awesome troll job though!), but yes logical fallacy:

 

 

[Over 29 years of fanhood]

On 12/24/2019 at 11:49 AM, Kirby Jackson said:

I don’t like it personally. There is NO upside imo. What do you guys think?

 

 

 

The best team in football has done this for two decades. No issue

[Billsatlastin2018]

46 minutes ago, Over 29 years of fanhood said:

 

The best team in football has done this for two decades. No issue

 

'The best team in football' played ONE less game, the vast majority of those years!

 

BIG issue.

[egd]

19 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

So Baltimore is scared or losers?

 

Baltimore is stupid. By resting their starters, plus having the bye week, they will be so rusty for their divisional game, which will be against us, btw. Bills beat Baltimore and go on to play New England in the conference finals, which we will also win, as it is hard for a team to beat the same team three times in a season.

[row_33]

12 hours ago, HardyBoy said:

Now I will say this. They have a sports science dept and detailed stats on each player in terms of their acceleration, top speed, cut abgle, etc with all sorts of variables baked in.  They know how much rest will cause certain players and positions will cause them to get out of game fitness/shape.

 

My guess, there will be certain players that the moment they hit a certain heart rate or some other measure they will get pulled. My guess is also for many players those benchmarks could get hit in pregame warm-ups.

wonderful, until one day they sustain a very serious injury,

 

oopsie poopsie.... that wasn’t on our computer program.....

 

 

[dubs]

The risk of playing anyone important is so asymmetrical relative to the reward it’s mind boggling someone could make the argument to play anyone. 
 

injuries to a key player are instantaneous and mostly happen in a split second in a live game versus a live opponent. 
 

improving on offense is something that takes many factors into account and certainly isn’t just live reps in a portion of a meaningless game. It’s reps over the course of a season and sometimes multiple seasons, players, play calling, opponents, etc...  
 

in other words there is no chance that a few reps is going to make any difference In performance, yet an injury to a key player could mean the difference between wins and losses. Asymmetrical risk. 

[4BillsintheBurgh]

9 minutes ago, dubs said:

The risk of playing anyone important is so asymmetrical relative to the reward it’s mind boggling someone could make the argument to play anyone. 
 

injuries to a key player are instantaneous and mostly happen in a split second in a live game versus a live opponent. 
 

improving on offense is something that takes many factors into account and certainly isn’t just live reps in a portion of a meaningless game. It’s reps over the course of a season and sometimes multiple seasons, players, play calling, opponents, etc...  
 

in other words there is no chance that a few reps is going to make any difference In performance, yet an injury to a key player could mean the difference between wins and losses. Asymmetrical risk. 

The issue is you can't take everyone out and when you pluck starters out here and there you put the remaining guys at higher risk. Like if bates is playing, misses a block and that guy hurts someone else. When eric wood broke his leg someone missed a block and that guy ended up causing the break. So maybe you can sit the boundry guys but the front 7 and the oline should be in there most of the game until the outcome is determined. We've had very few injuries this year, so maybe a little attention to the play calling and let them go.

[HardyBoy]

55 minutes ago, row_33 said:

wonderful, until one day they sustain a very serious injury,

 

oopsie poopsie.... that wasn’t on our computer program.....

 

 

 

Oh I'm 100% for keeping them out of the game and if staying game fit is even something playing into the decision having the players hit their game fit thresholds in warm-up or a simulated game before the game. 

 

There just aren't the roster spots to do that. Even where you have a backup, they're not game fit to play 40 snaps when they usually play 6. You can't ask Perry to carry 20 times, he very much most likely does not have the game fitness and will pull a hamstring or something.